决定异体 CAR T 细胞排斥与扩增的细胞和分子机制
Cellular and molecular mechanisms determining allogeneic CAR T cell rejection and expansion.
我们评估了11例接受单一批次cemacabtagene ansegedleucel(cema-cel)治疗的大B细胞淋巴瘤患者,cemacabtagene ansegedleucel是一种异体抗CD19 CAR T产品。
英文原题:Identifying Modifiers of CAR T-Cell Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.
我们为 IPDMA 确定了 89 项试验,共纳入 2,331 例患者。
CAR-T细胞疗法可有效治疗复发/难治性血液系统恶性肿瘤,但患者应答和安全结局存在异质性。本研究对血液系统恶性肿瘤CAR-T治疗开展个体患者数据荟萃分析(IPDMA),探讨患者层面因素是否会改变治疗疗效或安全性。检索MEDLINE、Embase和Cochrane CENTRAL,收集并合并纳入试验的个体数据,分析潜在效应修饰因素不同亚组的结局发生率。主要结局为完全缓解;次要结局为细胞因子释放综合征(CRS)及免疫效应细胞相关神经毒性综合征(ICANS)。研究纳入89项试验、2331例患者。根据癌症类型不同,完全缓解比例为25%–75%。接受桥接治疗者完全缓解率低于未接受者(34%比58%,RR .55,95% CI .30–.98);自体细胞来源者也低于异体细胞来源者(53%比67%,RR .61,95% CI .43–.87)。与仅靶向CD19的CAR-T疗法相比,同时靶向CD19及CD20、CD22、CD30、CD33、LeY、NKG2D或BCMA等其他靶点的疗法完全缓解率更高(72%比58%,RR 1.69,95% CI 1.15–2.50)。与异体细胞来源相比,自体细胞来源发生ICANS风险更高(24%比3%,RR 10.48,95% CI 1.87–58.57)。具体癌种中的CAR-T疗法安全性和疗效还受桥接治疗、CAR-T细胞来源和靶点、性别、年龄、细胞输注次数、共刺激结构域及剂量等因素影响。
CAR T-cell therapy is effective in relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies, but its use has been tempered by heterogeneity in response and safety outcomes. We performed individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) of CAR T-cell therapy in patients with hematologic malignancies to explore whether patient-level factors modify therapeutic efficacy/safety. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL for relevant trials. IPD was collected and pooled from each included trial, and prevalence of outcomes among strata of potential modifiers was explored. Our primary outcome was complete response, and the secondary outcomes were cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). We identified 89 trials comprising 2,331 patients for the IPDMA. Complete response proportion ranged from 25% to 75% depending on cancer type. Decreased complete response was seen in those that received bridging therapy compared to those that did not (34% vs 58%, RR:0.55, 95% CI:0.30-0.98), as well as with autologous cell sources compared to allogeneic sources (53% vs 67%, RR:0.61, 95% CI:0.43-0.87). Compared to CAR T-cell therapies targeting CD19 alone, therapies that combine CD19 targeting with additional targets such as CD20, CD22, CD30, CD33, LeY, NKG2D, or BCMA were associated with higher complete response rates (72% vs 58%, RR:1.69, 95% CI:1.15-2.50). Autologous cell sources demonstrated increased risk of ICANS relative to allogeneic sources (24% vs 3%, RR:10.48, 95% CI:1.87-58.57). Safety and efficacy of CAR T-cell therapy within specific cancer types was also affected by modifiers including bridging therapy, CAR T-cell source, CAR T-cell target, sex, age, number of cell infusions, co-stimulatory domain, and dose.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。